Who said IQ is the only predictor of success ? I've refuted that idea numerous times throughout this topic. I've said that it's by far the best predictor of success, with 3 times higher correlation than having wealthy parents for example, while certainly not being the only predictor of success.

What you have presented has nothing to do with IQ. Cultural influences that indeed might be even bigger than IQ fall into the category of "other factors important for success besides IQ".

This is why east asians make much better use of their IQ advantage than caucasians. They have an even better culture (in terms of helping for success) than caucasians. This results in the income difference and academic success differences between east asians and caucasians being much higher than the difference in IQ between these populations. The reverse is true for blacks where besides the IQ gap, cultural problems also come into play. Though I don't believe black culture is that bad for promoting success and inteligence. I think it's a billion levels above gypsy culture for example.

Lecture on realities of a society with an average IQ of 80
Cliffs;
Severely impaired abstract and counter-factual reasoning
Languages do not have words for abstracts like time, space, justice, future, past, morality, rudeness, precision etc

not sure what to make of it, seems f***d up

Last edited by DNS on Fri May 25, 2018 3:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:questionable, possibly disruptive video removed until we get time to access

18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

It depends on the intention as Bundokji noted and also if evidence to the contrary is considered.

Arthur Jensen was controversial because of those writings on race.

In a later article, Jensen argued that his claims had been misunderstood:

...nowhere have I "claimed" an "innate deficiency" of intelligence in blacks. My position on this question is clearly spelled out in my most recent book: "The plain fact is that at present there exists no scientifically satisfactory explanation for the differences between the IQ distributions in the black and white populations. The only genuine consensus among well-informed scientists on this topic is that the cause of the difference remains an open question." (Jensen, 1981a, p. 213).

Although a critic of Jensen's thesis,[14] economist Thomas Sowell, criticizing the taboo against research on race and intelligence, wrote:

Professor Jensen pointed out back in 1969 that black children's IQ scores rose by 8 to 10 points after he met with them informally in a play room and then tested them again after they were more relaxed around him. He did this because "I felt these children were really brighter than their IQ would indicate." What a shame that others seem to have less confidence in black children than Professor Jensen has had.[15]

Lisa Suzuki and Joshua Aronson of New York University wrote that Jensen had largely ignored evidence which failed to support his position that IQ test score gaps represent genetic racial differences.[27]

I think it depends on the intention of sharing it. Why is this important?

It is and it isn't important, i think evolutionary biology and intelligence in particular is an interesting subject. Questions like "why.." or "how..." can't be answered if one does not study the data.

Its hard to imagine anybody who understands statistics would be offended by this really.

It is and it isn't important, i think evolutionary biology and intelligence in particular is an interesting subject.

I can only speak about myself. The term "truth" can be a favorite tool of my unenlightened mind to promote itself. What would be more ego-inflating than conveying an image of an "intellectual hero" who is fearless to engage in sensitive and divisive topics under the guise of objectivity?

But again, this is only me!

And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

It is and it isn't important, i think evolutionary biology and intelligence in particular is an interesting subject.

I can only speak about myself. The term "truth" can be a favorite tool of my unenlightened mind to promote itself. What would be more ego-inflating than conveying an image of an "intellectual hero" who is fearless to engage in sensitive and divisive topics under the guise of objectivity?

But again, this is only me!

Ego inflating, perhaps becoming an expert in some field or profession. I don't think largely speculating and citing other people's research is very high up there.

The deen of Harward was forced to resign because of PC censorship of these facts. He was asked why do black students have, on average, lower grades and he replied that it might have to do with differences in average IQ.

The fact that some guys in the past used this to justify slavery in north america should not make us censor science. Those same guys used christianity to justify their actions. (slaves have no souls idea) Does that mean we should now censor christianity ? Children have lower IQ than adults and nobody seems to have a problem with that. Usually it is people with higher IQ than us that we tend to be jealous of and develop hatred towards.

As for those in the "IQ means nothing" camp or "IQ is just a social construction and it just means you can pass a certain test" - they should ask themselves why were some groups of people unable to learn how to make a fire or invent the wheel if this thing is just some random number on a paper.

The problem is that above does not state *why* the average IQ might be lower in some cases and leads ppl to draw the wrong conclusions regarding race.

For much of human history, Africa was cut-off from the whole world by

1) the impenetrable Sahara desert
2) surrounded by Ocean

So it could not learn from the interchange of ideas and technology the way, for instance the west learned about math and science from the Muslims who in turn learned from thier contacts with India and China.

I highly recommend this very balanced article -- published in a leading magazine of politically conservative opinion.
The magazine asked, so he wrote it.

A taste of the reasoning in the article:

Stop Obsessing Over Race and IQ
In sum, various thinkers insist, some more publicly than others, that we are at fault in not openly “facing” that there is a genetic IQ gap between black people and others. Yet there would seem to be no constructive benefit in “facing” this gap if it exists.

One thing that may undergird these thinkers’ sense that this issue must be “aired” is a general resentment of the Left’s censorious policing of race issues in general. As someone who has taken issue with such policing at length, I share these thinkers’ grievance that on so many topics — such as the value of standardized testing, the wisdom of open-ended racial preferences, the definition of cultural appropriation, whether black-on-black crime or the police present the direst threat to poor black communities, and others — views other than the Left’s are blithely dismissed as morally repugnant. A more open and honest discussion of such matters has direct implications for the well-being of the black community. But the IQ issue is different. To discuss it would shed not more heat than light, but all heat and no light.

Our valuation of intelligence, combined with black people’s grievous history in America, suggests an eccentric yet logical approach to the issue of race and IQ: As a topic whose discussion will yield injury, fury, and doubletalk with no countervailing benefits in terms of prescriptions for how society ought to operate ...

That is: Intelligence researchers, writing in dense, obscure academic journals, will continue to quietly present data that show that race influences the heritability of IQ to certain degrees; others will present data in disagreement. I hope they ultimately settle on a verdict that environment really does entirely trump the heritable portion of the IQ difference; possibly they will not. However, in the wider world, I see no reason that this research should be “faced” and subject to ongoing “debate.” ...
-- https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/ ... o-purpose/

– John McWhorter teaches linguistics, philosophy, and music history at Columbia University. His latest books are Words on the Move and Talking Back, Talking Black.
If readers are wondering ... McWhorter self-identifies as a political liberal (politically left wing in the US). But he challenges some elements of progressive/liberal ideology which now a days means one is likely to be branded a conservative or even far right by others. He is a regular guest on this audio & video blog with a black economist Glenn Loury.https://bloggingheads.tv/programs/current/glenn-show

I highly recommend this very balanced article -- published in a leading magazine of politically conservative opinion.
The magazine asked, so he wrote it.

A taste of the reasoning in the article:

Stop Obsessing Over Race and IQ
In sum, various thinkers insist, some more publicly than others, that we are at fault in not openly “facing” that there is a genetic IQ gap between black people and others. Yet there would seem to be no constructive benefit in “facing” this gap if it exists.

One thing that may undergird these thinkers’ sense that this issue must be “aired” is a general resentment of the Left’s censorious policing of race issues in general. As someone who has taken issue with such policing at length, I share these thinkers’ grievance that on so many topics — such as the value of standardized testing, the wisdom of open-ended racial preferences, the definition of cultural appropriation, whether black-on-black crime or the police present the direst threat to poor black communities, and others — views other than the Left’s are blithely dismissed as morally repugnant. A more open and honest discussion of such matters has direct implications for the well-being of the black community. But the IQ issue is different. To discuss it would shed not more heat than light, but all heat and no light.

Our valuation of intelligence, combined with black people’s grievous history in America, suggests an eccentric yet logical approach to the issue of race and IQ: As a topic whose discussion will yield injury, fury, and doubletalk with no countervailing benefits in terms of prescriptions for how society ought to operate ...

That is: Intelligence researchers, writing in dense, obscure academic journals, will continue to quietly present data that show that race influences the heritability of IQ to certain degrees; others will present data in disagreement. I hope they ultimately settle on a verdict that environment really does entirely trump the heritable portion of the IQ difference; possibly they will not. However, in the wider world, I see no reason that this research should be “faced” and subject to ongoing “debate.” ...
-- https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/07/ ... o-purpose/

– John McWhorter teaches linguistics, philosophy, and music history at Columbia University. His latest books are Words on the Move and Talking Back, Talking Black.
If readers are wondering ... McWhorter self-identifies as a political liberal (politically left wing in the US). But he challenges some elements of progressive/liberal ideology which now a days means one is likely to be branded a conservative or even far right by others. He is a regular guest on this audio & video blog with a black economist Glenn Loury.https://bloggingheads.tv/programs/current/glenn-show

"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'" - Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta

'Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return.' - Genesis 3:19

'Some fart freely, some try to hide and silence it. Which one is correct?' - Saegnapha

It's called the BITCH test (lol). It's a 100 question verbal test in which the questions were based off of 1970's African American vernacular, instead of the typical White American diction. As expected, Black students significantly outperformed White students, even after controlling for socioeconomic status.

This, as well as the strong possibility that even visual-spatial test questions are verbal in nature (such as the multiple triangle overlays and multiple questions about dots in and around shapes, which would be easier questions for a Jewish student who studies Hebrew and observes the Star of David on a regular basis), should be enough to lead a reasonable person to question the "authenticity" of the current "IQ gap".

(I'm not picking on Jews. I have no problem with Jews as a people and there are many Jewish people whom I like and respect.)